Tbf people not wanting to play with him is the point I think.

The idea is that the big corrupt polluters would cease to exist and be replaced with smaller and weaker corrupt polluters. The only reason we haven’t hit net zero yet is corporate lobbying; remove that and you’re halfway there.

I am not sure how another economic system will fix this.

Other economic systems have assholes, true, but capitalism is uniquely myopic in this respect. A socialist system would take away the polluters’ power to hinder change. There’s a reason (still capitalist to be fair) China is a world leader in renewable energy, and that’s because they don’t have rich and powerful lobbies forcing fossil fuels down people’s throats.

But I would argue setting the incentives right, can mitigate damage

Until capitalists use their wealth and power to remove those incentives, which leads us back to “end capitalism.” This is the fundamental problem with reformism; under capitalism there will naturally be mechanisms for resisting and winding back said reform, making “nicer” versions of it mere interludes interrupting the crushing boot of exploitation and destruction we all know and love.

Not exactly, some people already hate America.

K.

It was very clear to me from the start that for a majority of the afghan people, life would get significantly worse under the Taliban.

Except one of the reasons the Taliban took over the country as fast as they did is that the US backed government . The US-backed government was a rotten corrupt cesspool that gave its subjects marginally more civil rights at the cost of plunging the country into decades of civil/“civil” war and destroying any chance at development and progress due to its rampant corruption and incompetence. They did a couple of things right (though very half assed), but it’s downright comical to talk about “liberation” when two thirds of the population were illiterate. Not to say the Taliban are any better at these things, but at least the Taliban don’t have the world’s strongest military backing them.

Data theft? Data should be a public good where authors are guaranteed a dignified life (decoupled from the sale of their labor).

I’ve seen it said somewhere that, with the advent of AI, society has to embrace UBI or perish, and while that’s an exaggeration it does basically get the point across.

Nah those guys hate (gen)AI because it’s (gen)AI, or for other reasons that are ultimately intrinsic to the tech such as the intellectual property aspect.

I’m not even an anarchist, but anything and everything related to job hunting, for instance.

I mean to be fair to MAGAts, libs pull off some legitimately impressive mental gymnastics when you criticise Obama, so it works 100% of the time 75% of the time.

Your 2 party system has been ridiculed even by Marx,

Sauce please.

The vast majority of people don’t vote in primaries for some reason so the demographics are different from the general, but also the DNC has plenty of tricks at its disposal to get the results they want. Now part of the reason those tricks work is that American leftist politicians tend to be pussies who are unwilling to take shots at liberals, but yeah the whole process is captured by DNC liberals.

What monopoly?

Again, you’re assuming that this belief exists in a vacuum and not as part of an elaborate belief system with clauses specifically meant to address this. Besides, your average leftist believes that if you (well society at large more like) disagree with them millions if not billions of people will be condemned to lifelong poverty for generations. The scale is a bit smaller than eternal damnation, but really this is just how it goes when you have strong/high-stakes opinions about anything.

A “true” believer therefore has a moral imperative of destroying diversity in order to protect other people.

I mean they have a moral imperative to try within whatever limits their interpretation of the religion imposes, but that’s it. It’s not like these religions imply, say, putting followers of other religions in reeducation camps. One can fully operate in a diverse society while still thinking “I’m right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to this thing,” for the same reason having political opinions isn’t mutually exclusive with diversity. BTW Islam =/= Islamism. The former is a religion; the latter is a political ideology based on the religion.

Frankly the “pay someone to talk about how awesome your product is” brand of ads has always been kinda creepy, so this is par for the course.

Missing the EU on the right side, because let’s face it the EU’s biggest enemy is itself (and its weird dedication to licking Uncle Sam boot).

The Gestapo? (Not so) secret police? Definitely not a terrorist organization if that’s what you’re implying.

I’m no fan of the IRGC, but this is not what a terrorist organization is if this word is supposed to have a meaning (which it doesn’t).

That isn’t centrist, that’s just dumb

It’s both. Equating being shot while participating in a coup with being shot while “protesting” the Gestapo is centrist as hell, specifically the “we should be nice to Nazis” brand of centrism.